7 Rules of Historic Research

“Sometimes the available evidence is such as to eliminate any reasonable doubt about the validity of an interpretation.”
Frederick Copleston, Problems of Objectivity, On the History of Philosophy

“The historian’s real work is the reconstruction in thought of a particular historical event: the geologist’s, the reconstruction in thought of a particular geological epoch at a particular place.”
R. G. Collingwood, “Croce’s Philosophy of History”, Essays in the Philosophy of History

“It is precisely the historian’s goal, using all his critical skills, to determine what happened in the past by reconstructing it on the basis of the evidence.”
W.L. Craig, Reasonable Faith

“Truth is what my peers will let me get away with saying”
Richard Rorty

1. The hypothesis, together with other true statements, must imply further statements describing present observable data.
2. The hypothesis must have greater explanatory scope (that is, imply a greater variety of observable data) than rival hypotheses.
3. The hypothesis must have greater explanatory power (that is, make the observable date more probable) than rival hypotheses.
4. The hypothesis must be more plausible (that is, be implied by a greater variety of accepted truths, and its negation implied by few accepted truths, and its negation implied by fewer accepted truths) than rival hypotheses.
5. The hypothesis must be less ad hoc (that is, include fewer new suppositions about the past not already implied by existing knowledge) than rival hypotheses.
6. The hypothesis must be disconfirmed by fewer accepted beliefs (that is, when conjoined with accepted truths, imply fewer false statements) than rival hypotheses.
7. The hypothesis must so exceed its rivals in fulfilling conditions (2)-(6) that there is little chance of a rival hypothesis, after further investigation, exceeding it in meeting these conditions.